有关lawyer方法和Bible方法中的Causality的问题

happyevent2019 · 发表于 2018-6-28 15:28:00

有讨论说lawyer的方法是bible的精缩版，这个毋庸置疑。但最近看到大家对于因果型结论的总结都局限在结论句上，即premise描述两个事件同时发生或前后发生，结论就断定一件事A导致另一件事B的发生。然后答案思路是他因导致B, 或者因果相反 bla,bla,bla....
但最近看powerscore bible 发现Causality 即因果关系论证章节，不仅仅是局限于以上形式，还包括更广泛的premise和conclusion的因果关系。

如下面一个例子就是在powerscore里的causality章节作为练习题来出的。其中结论并没有明显体现因果关系，只是premise中提到了导致结论发生的原因。

Alpha Cola, the best selling soft drink nationally among soda drinkers aged 18 to 25, recently completed an expensive and successful ad campaign. The makers of Epsilon Cola, a less popular soft drink that has been on the market for many years, claim that without the recent ad campaign, Alpha Cola would be no more popular than Epsilon.
Which of the following, if true, would cast the most serious doubt on the assertion of the makers of Epsilon Cola?
(A) Alpha Cola’s recent ad campaign was intended in part to increase sales of the soft drink to soda drinkers aged 18 to 25.
(B) Beverage buying decisions can be significantly influenced with effective ad campaigns.
(C) Alpha Cola’s recent advertising campaign was one of the most expensive advertising campaigns in history.
(D) Prior to the recent campaign, Alpha Cola had never advertised but had significantly outsold all other soft drinks on the market for several years.
(E) Most people prefer the taste of Epsilon Cola to that of Alpha Cola.

所以，我的问题是：大家遇到以上这样的情况，题目答案预测的thinking pattern 是指找结论句不成立的答案，直接攻击flaw，还是有因果关系那5中思路在里面啊？因为两种思路所用的思考时间及答案预测方向都有很大不同。另外，有些直接找结论句不存在的情况多数都是new information，如果归类到因果关系里的他因导致结果这个思路也是说得通的，但不确定这样的思路会不会没有代表性，太浪费时间。求解答，万分感谢！！

有关lawyer方法和Bible方法中的Causality的问题

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()